TRANSPORTATION  FACILITIES 
IN  AND  AROUND  THE 
CITY  OF  BOSTON 


BEFORE  THE 

Railroad  Commissioners  and  Transit  Commission 

(Sitting  jointly) 

Boston,  Mass.,  Nov.  1,  1910 


STATEMENT  BY 

MAJ.  GEN.  WILLIAM  A.  BANCROFT,  President. 

For  the  Boston  Elevated  Railway  Co. 


BOSTON 

Geo.  H.  Ellis  Co.,  Printers,  272  Congress  Street 
1010 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 
in  2018  with  funding  from 

University  of  Illinois  Urbana-Champaign  Alternates 


https://archive.org/details/transportationfaOObanc 


CONTINUED  HEARING  BEFORE  THE  BOARD 
OF  RAILROAD  COMMISSIONERS  AND  THE 
BOSTON  TRANSIT  COMMISSION,  SITTING 
JOINTLY,  UNDER  RESOLVES  RELATIVE  TO 
THE  IMPROVEMENT  OF  TRANSPORTATION 
FACILITIES  IN  AND  AROUND  THE  CITY  OF 
BOSTON. 


Office  of  the  Boston  Transit  Commission, 

15  Beacon  Street,  Boston,  November  1,  1910. 


The  Chairman  (Commissioner  Hall).  We  are  ready  to 
proceed,  gentlemen. 

Mr.  Snow.  Mr.  Chairman  and  Gentlemen  of  the  Joint 
Board , — This  is  the  time  which  was  assigned  for  hearing 
the  Boston  Elevated  Railway  Company  in  regard  to  all 
the  matters  which  are  now  before  the  Joint  Board  for 
consideration.  General  Bancroft,  the  president  of  the 
company,  is  here  to  make  a  statement  on  behalf  of  the 


Boston  Elevated  Railway,  and  I  would  like  to  have  you 
listen  to  him.  He  will  now  address  you. 


STATEMENT  BY 

GENERAL  WILLIAM  A.  BANCROFT. 


The  Past. 

Mr.  Chairman, — About  fifteen  years  ago  a  group  of 


young  men  was  formed  for  the  purpose  of  meeting  the 


c*  then  existing  situation  with  respect  to  the  local  transit 
£  problems  of  this  community.  In  many  relations  of  life 
£  it  is  not  seemly  to  recite  one’s  achievements,  but  the 


4 


achievements  of  that  group  of  young  men  it  is  not  only 
proper  to  recite,  but  it  is  their  duty  to  be  heard.  That 
group  was  associated  in  their  board  of  directors,  for  they 
became  an  organized  concern,  with  older  men.  The  group 
I  have  in  mind  consisted  of  two  bankers,  an  able  lawyer, 
a  capable  and  successful  business  man,  a  trained  railroad 
man,  who  had  been  in  the  service  of  the  West  End  from 
its  inception,  and  for  a  considerable  portion  of  the  time 
had  been  its  general  manager,  an  experienced  engineer,  and 
a  farmer.  I,  being  the  farmer,  can  speak  with  more  pro¬ 
priety  of  the  achievements  of  the  group  than  can  the  others, 
who  are  more  highly  endowed,  and  who  have  contributed 
more  to  those  achievements.  I  also  have  the  advantage 
of  a  longer  acquaintance  with  the  street  railway  affairs 
of  this  community,  for  it  is  now  nearly  twenty-six  years 
since  I  became  superintendent  of  one  of  the  horse  railroads 
in  the  not  satisfactory  days  of  active  competition.  For 
three  years  I  was  superintendent  of  a  horse  railroad,  and 
for  two  years  after  that  I  was  general  roadmaster  of  the 
West  End.  For  a  number  of  years  following  that  I  was  not 
in  the  street  railway  business,  but  was  a  practising  lawyer, 
whose  duty  it  was  to  occasionally  sue  the  West  End,  and 
then  for  two  years  I  was  president  of  the  board  of  aldermen 
of  the  largest  suburban  city  and  mayor  of  that  city  for 
four  years,  so  I  kept  in  touch  with  the  doings  of  the  street 
railway  companies.  I  saw  the  operations,  in  a  way,  from 
the  inside  and  also  from  the  official  outside,  “the  whole 
of  which  I  saw  and  a  (small)  part  of  which  I  was.” 

I  recall  the  days  of  the  horse-car  competition.  I  partici¬ 
pated.  I  recall  the  intolerable  situation  at  that  time, 
which  the  public  seems  to  have  forgotten,  when,  in  1887, 
Mr.  Henry  M.  Whitney  came  forward  with  his  proposition 
of  consolidation  and  of  electrical  equipment.  Mr.  Whitney 
had  a  proposition  to  make  to  the  public.  He  made  it,  but 
it  was  a  venturesome  thing  for  him  to  do  in  those  days. 


5 


He  quickly  cleared  up  the  intolerable  horse-car  competition 
and  the  bad  situation.  The  provision  for  motive  power 
was  not  so  easy.  Indeed,  at  that  time  it  was  well  nigh  a 
sheer  hazard,  but  Mr.  Whitney  went  to  the  Legislature,  and 
made  his  proposition,  which  was  accepted,  and  Mr.  Whitney 
made  good. 

Ten  years  later  another  situation  existed.  The  commu¬ 
nity  desired  rapid  transit.  They  didn’t  have  it.  The  free 
transfer  question  was  a  political  issue,  and  had  been  for  a 
number  of  years.  The  compensation  for  public  franchises 
was  not  in  a  satisfactory  state.  This  group  of  young  men 
to  whom  I  have  alluded  went  to  the  Legislature  with  a 
proposition  to  clear  up  the  then  situation.  That  propo¬ 
sition  was  substantially  unanimously  adopted  by  the  Legis¬ 
lature,  by  both  houses,  and  was  approved  by  his  Excellency. 

I  submit  that  that  group  of  young  men  have  made  good. 
We  have  been  trying  for  the  last  six  weeks,  by  advertise¬ 
ments  in  the  newspapers,  to  inform  the  community  what 
we  have  done.  The  result,  I  am  bound  to  say,  has  not 
increased  our  confidence  in  the  much-lauded  publicity  policy 
of  a  public  service  corporation.  I  understand  that  these 
advertisements  of  ours,  which  have  shown  in  the  clearest 
and  simplest  way,  both  by  graphic  cut  and  by  succinct 
recital,  what  we  have  done,  have  not  been  generally  read. 
I  assume  that  those  who  have  been  concerned  in  local  trans¬ 
portation  have  read  them;  but  I  do  think  it  important  to 
recall  briefly  just  what  I  mean,  by  a  map  which  has  been 
placed  here,  so  it  can  be  seen  with  sufficient  clearness, 
showing  the  situation  as  it  was  in  1898,  and  then  the  suc¬ 
cessive  steps  which  have  changed  that  situation  and  led 
down  to  the  situation  of  to-day. 

In  1898  the  Tremont  Street  subway  had  been  built  and 
was  in  operation.  It  performed  an  important  function  in 
clearing  up  the  congestion  along  Tremont  Street  and  some 
of  the  adjacent  streets.  Its  relation  to  the  territory  now 


6 


served  by  the  Elevated  you  can  see  on  that  map.  It  was 
a  thing  to  be  done;  but,  in  so  far  as  that  group  of  young  men 
was  concerned,  it  could  not  be  said  they  did  it,  for  they 
found  it.  They  immediately  set  about  fulfilling  their  prom¬ 
ises,  and  in  1901  the  Elevated  Road  was  opened.  I  will 
not  stop  to  say  what  it  has  accomplished.  I  will  only  say 
it  was  intended  to  supply  rapid  transit,  and  that  from 
Dudley  Street  to  Sullivan  Square,  where  the  running  time 
was  forty-five  minutes,  if  it  could  be  made  in  that  time,  it 
was  reduced  to  twenty-one  minutes,  and  six  miles  of  double 
track  thoroughfare  were  built.  It  was  necessary  to  use  the 
subway,  which  was  not  adapted  for  the  purpose,  but  we 
overcame  the  obstacles  and  used  it.  We  furnished  two  rapid 
transit  thoroughfares  through  the  business  heart  of  Boston, 
one  almost  through  the  centre,  the  other  on  the  easterly 
side.  It  involved  a  very  large  expenditure  of  money.  It 
involved  at  that  time  all  kinds  of  opposition  and  condem¬ 
nation.  I  remember  that  a  worthy  mayor  of  a  neighboring 
city  said  to  me,  “You  and  Gaston  are  lawyers,  you  are  not 
going  to  stay  in  such  a  thing  as  that.”  But  Mr.  Gaston 
stayed  several  years  until  after  the  elevated  railway  w^as  in 
actual  operation  and  his  promises  fulfilled,  when  propriety 
brought  it  about  that  he  should  withdraw,  for  he  was  nomi¬ 
nated  for  the  high  office  of  governor.  I  have  not  as  yet 
“got  cold  feet.”  Mr.  T.  J.  Coolidge,  Jr.,  one  of  the  gentle¬ 
men  wTho  started  with  us,  also  withdrew.  Both  those  with¬ 
drawals  were  many  years  ago.  We  have  since  had  the  ad¬ 
vantage  of  Mr.  Snow’s  advice  and  guidance,  and  more 
recently  Mr.  James  L.  Richards,  one  of  the  ablest  business 
men  and  one  of  the  most  public-spirited  mien,  has  become 
a  member  of  our  board  of  directors  and  of  our  executive 
committee. 

The  East  Boston  tunnel  was  provided  for  by  the  same 
Act.  John  L.  Bates  was  a  representative  from  East  Boston 
and  Speaker  of  the  House.  He  advocated  the  tunnel.  In 


7 


fact,  in  the  classic  language  of  Hon.  Albert  E.  Pillsbury, 
“  Governor  Bates  found  East  Boston  an  island  and  left 
it  a  continent.”  The  tunnel,  we  think,  performed  a  very 
important  function:  it  certainly  gave  us  an  east  and  west 
thoroughfare,  so  far  as  it  is  possible  to  have  an  east  and  west 
thoroughfare  in  our  geographical  situation,  and  it  added 
greatly  to  the  comfort  and  convenience  of  the  people  of 
East  Boston. 

The  subway  was  unsuitable  for  elevated  train  operation, 
as  I  have  said.  The  Washington  Street  tunnel  was  early 
projected,  and  was  built. 

It  still  further  reduced  the  running  time  between  Dud¬ 
ley  Street  and  Sullivan  Square  to  18  minutes, — or  18J4 
minutes,  to  be  exact, — and  gave  the  third  rapid  transit 
north  and  south  thoroughfare  through  the  business  heart 
of  Boston,  together  with  an  east  and  west  thoroughfare 
through  the  East  Boston  tunnel. 

It  has  been  said  that  we  have  had  no  comprehensive 
design,  no  orderly  method  of  proceeding.  Well,  I  don’t 
think  it  is  important  whether  we  have  or  not,  or  whether 
anybody  has  or  not.  What  I  do  say  is  this,  and  I  am  prepared 
to  support  the  assertion,  that  through  skill  and  experience 
there  has  been  gradually  developed  an  orderly  and  compre¬ 
hensive  design.  I  do  not  mean  to  say  that  the  design  has 
been  fully  executed,  or  that  it  cannot  be  modified,  or  that 
it  cannot  perhaps  be  altered  in  some  of  its  details,  but  from 
the  very  necessity  of  our  geography  it  had  to  be  adopted. 
In  shape  we  are  essentially  a  wheel,  with  the  business  part 
of  the  city  as  the  hub;  but  like  all  coast  communities  the 
wheel  is  not  complete  on  one  side,  here  because  of  the  bay 
directly  to  the  east.  But  in  other  respects  we  are  like  a 
wheel,  and  the  design  is  so  natural,  so  simple,  and  yet  so 
effective,  that  we  cannot  see  how  it  can  be  substantially 
altered. 

The  design  is  this:  that  every  community  shall  have  a 


8 


direct  and  rapid  approach  to  the  business  heart  of  Boston. 
We  have  had  another  design  which  was  perfectly  natural, 
that  these  rapid  transit  thoroughfares,  which  were  provided 
as  the  spokes  of  the  wheel,  should  be  fed  by  the  surface 
lines.  The  number  of  people  who  use  any  railroad,  or 
rapid  transit  station,  who  actually  live  near  a  station,  is  com¬ 
paratively  small.  Even  in  the  country  people  are  driven, 
unless  they  walk,  for  a  considerable  distance  to  the  railroad 
station.  Here  we  provide  the  economical  and  convenient 
surface  car  to  carry  people  to  the  rapid  transit  stations. 
It  will  become  necessary,  for  one  reason  or  another,  to  ex¬ 
tend,  as  we  have  extended  to  Forest  Hills,  the  Elevated 
system,  as  the  population  increases  enough  to  warrant  it. 
But  the  plan  or  the  design  of  the  thoroughfares  to  differ¬ 
ent  sections  is  as  I  have  stated.  Therefore  we  have  built, 
or  are  building,  and  have  it  well  under  way,  the  East  Cam¬ 
bridge  Elevated  extension  which  you  see  here.  I  will  not 
undertake  now  to  enumerate  all  the  advantages  of  that 
extension  to  the  people  in  a  portion  of  Cambridge  and  of 
Somerville,  not  to  mention  the  relief  of  Sullivan  Square, 
but  there  it  is.  We  are  also  building,  and  it  is  well  under 
way,  a  thoroughfare  to  Harvard  Square,  which  will  have 
that  as  its  terminal,  as  well  as  a  station  about  a  mile  this 
side,  and  another  one  nearer  Boston.  But  the  design  is 
there,  and  the  provision  is  there. 

I  am  speaking  in  terms  of  millions,  because  some  of  these 
provisions  have  cost,  or  are  costing,  either  the  community 
or  ourselves,  in  the  investment,  and  we  have  to  support 
the  investment,  some  twelve  millions  of  dollars,  some 
nine  millions,  some  costing  eight  millions,  and  some  costing 
less,  but  all  in  the  millions. 

The  Riverbank  subway,  which  is  shown  here,  is  another 
spoke  which  will  be  of  great  benefit  to  another  portion  of 
Boston,  namely,  Brighton,  as  well  as  to  a  portion  of  Brook¬ 
line,  and  will  also  serve  the  communities  of  Newton  and 


9 


Watertown;  and  beyond  that,  Waltham,  which  is  not  a 
part  of  our  system,  but  whose  people  ride  in  on  our  cars. 

Here  is  another  case  [referring  to  the  map]  of  extension 
to  the  north,  which  is  an  extension  from  Sullivan  Square  to 
Everett  and  Malden.  The  spokes  of  the  wheel  are  appear¬ 
ing. 

We  have  made  large  contributions.  We  found  less  than 
twenty-six  million  dollars  of  capital  invested.  There  is  now 
invested  upwards  of  eighty-one  million  dollars.  We  have 
undertaken  to  expend  in  the  next  four  or  five  years  thirty- 
one  million  dollars  more,  making  a  total  investment,  by 
1914,  of  $112,000,000.  Some  one  has  told  me  that  it  is  a 
dollar  for  every  $20  of  the  taxable  valuation  in  the  com¬ 
munity  which  we  serve.  It  is  a  large  sum  of  money. 

There  are  some  of  these  things  [referring  to  the  map]  that 
we  have  helped  to  do.  The  provisions  for  the  boulevards 
are  shown  in  green.  The  other  lines  are  on  the  preceding 
map. 

We  haven’t  been  idle  with  the  surface  system.  We  found 
3043/2  miles,  to  be  exact,  of  surface  track.  We  have  added 
156  more  in  all  parts  of  the  community.  These  recitals 
that  we  have  printed  in  the  newspapers  state  definitely, 
succinctly,  and  correctly  the  cost  of  those  provisions  and 
what  they  have  cost  us.  I  shall  be  glad  to  send  the  members 
of  the  Joint  Board  copies  of  these  when  they  are  prepared. 
I  think  that  they  contain  useful  information. 

We  have  a  map  here  showing  the  total  contributions  so 
far  on  the  work  actually  accomplished  on  the  lines  that  have 
not  been  built,  like  the.  West  End  Elevated  and  the  Malden 
Extension;  also  on  those  unfinished,  like  the  East  Cambridge 
extension  and  the  Harvard  Square  extension;  and,  in  a 
different  color,  the  surface  lines. 

We  have  added  180  miles  of  track  (24  elevated)  to  the 
3043/2  miles  that  we  found.  In  twelve  years  we  have  added 
60  per  cent,  as  much  in  track  mileage  as  had  been  done  in 


10 


forty-two  years.  We  have  supplied  many  cars  (I  don’t 
have  in  mind  exactly  how  many,  but  more  than  six  hundred) , 
and  219  elevated  cars  at  least.  When  I  became  superin¬ 
tendent,  we  rode  in  a  car  that  seated  22  people.  The 
last  191  cars  which  we  have  acquired  for  surface  use  seat 
52  persons  each.  We  have  provided  additional  power  and 
new  depots.  These  extensions  have  gone  beyond  our 
former  limits.  The  5-cent  fare  has  been  extended,  and 
it  has  been  extended  to  the  health  and  comfort  of  the 
community. 

There  has  been  a  suggestion  in  regard  to  the  population. 
My  impression  is  (it  is  not  the  last  census,  but  as  near  as  we 
could  calculate  from  what  data  we  could  get  in  the  last 
year)  the  East  Boston  and  Chelsea  section  has  a  popula¬ 
tion  of  nearly  92,000.  The  territory  to  the  north  is  more 
tributary  to  the  Elevated,  but  will  be  in  part  tributary  to 
the  East  Cambridge  Elevated  extension.  This  contains 
258,000.  The  Cambridge  subway  territory  contains  150,000. 
The  Brookline  and  Brighton  territory  will  contain  at  least 
98,000.  The  territory  to  the  south,  which  is  largely  served, 
but  not  altogether,  as  you  can  see,  by  the  Elevated  Rail¬ 
road  to  Dudley  Street  and  Forest  Hills,  contains  over  391,- 
000.  That  is  the  largest  section  which  has  only  a  single 
rapid  transit  provision. 

Now  we  have  done  these  things,  and  we  think  that  we 
have  made  good.  Everybody  who  is  engaged  in  street 
railway  transportation  in  Boston  who  has  been  responsible 
has  made  good.  When  the  horse  cars  came  in,  in  1856,  there 
was  an  uproar  and  tremendous  opposition  and  some  hard 
things  were  said,  but  the  horse  cars  made  good,  and  the 
“ busses”  gradually  disappeared.  When  Mr.  Whitney  came 
along  in  1887  with  the  consolidation  of  the  roads  and  the 
electrifying  of  the  system,  he  made  good.  Since  Mr. 
Robert  Winsor  and  his  associates  came  along  in  1897  to 
provide  rapid  transit  and  to  clear  up  the  free  transfer  and 


11 


the  compensation  tax  questions,  we  have  made  good,  or 
else  those  $55,000,000  and  those  hundreds  of  miles  of  track 
in  these  rapid  transit  features  on  these  maps  mean  nothing. 

The  Future. 

Mr.  Chairman,  we  want  to  go  on.  But  the  situation  is 
an  embarrassing  one.  It  is  not  so  serious  as  it  was  in  1887 
or  1897.  This  group  of  young  men  are  still  active.  They 
have  had  more  than  twelve  years  of  service;  they  have  had 
the  advantages  of  the  wisdom  of  the  successive  governors 
of  the  Commonwealth,  of  the  successive  legislatures,  of  the 
important  boards  which  I  am  now  addressing;  they  have 
had  the  benefit  of  their  own  experience  in  the  business. 
But  we  now  meet  a  situation  that  is  awkward  and  embar¬ 
rassing.  Never  has  anything,  or  can  anything  be  done  in 
this  community  without  its  own  co-operation. 

Now,  on  the  map  of  the  population,  and  on  this  map  [re¬ 
ferring  to  map]  a  gap  is  shown,  a  gap  which  reaches  a  terri¬ 
tory  populated,  I  guess, — and  I  am  willing  to  have  my 
guess  revised,  and  the  actual  fact  ascertained, — by  175,000 
people,  I  guess  more,  I  don’t  care,  we  can  find  out  what 
the  facts  are  from  those  who  are  interested.  There  is  no 
rapid  transit  provision  to  Dorchester.  There  is  no  rapid 
transit  thoroughfare,  although  one  or  both  of  your  honor¬ 
able  boards  have  been  directed  to  prepare  a  bill  to  show  the 
route  for  and  cost  of  a  rapid  transit  thoroughfare  from  Park 
Street  to  the  South  Station.  There  is  no  rapid  transit 
provision  to  South  Boston. 

Now,  will  you  help  us?  I  wish  to  be  absolutely  frank  with 
this  Joint  Board  and  with  this  community.  We  need  your 
help.  We  want  to  extend  this  system.  Never  mind  the 
design;  let  it  be  improved,  if  it  can  be;  we  are  willing  to 
extend  this  system.  We  want  your  help,  and  we  want  the 
community’s  help.  Here  is  a  situation  where  no  one  alone 


12 


can  so  effectively  do  the  thing  as  by  the  co-operation  of  all. 
Our  plan  has  been  to  give  to  this  community  a  symmetrical 
and  orderly  system  of  local  transportation.  We  have 
intended  to  give  it  to  all  parts  of  this  community:  the 
design  permits  it.  We  want  to  build  out  here  to  Dorchester 
via  the  South  Station  and  South  Boston. 

Now,  here  is  the  awkward  situation.  Capital  is  needed, 
and  it  must  be  interested  if  this  thing  is  to  be  done.  There 
must  be  reasonably  favorable  inducements  for  capital. 
Now,  what ,  is  confronting  us?  Everybody  recognizes  it. 
There  are  these  three  leases,  of  the  Tremont  subway,  the 
East  Boston  tunnel,  and  the  Washington  Street  tunnel, 
expiring,  the  first  one,  in  less  than  seven  years.  There  is 
the  West  End  Railway  situation  which  must  be  cleared 
up  if  we  are  to  be  enabled, — and  this  is  put  in  the  frankest, 
most  co-operative,  most  kindly  spirit,  and  I  wish  I  had  the 
gift  to  do  it  more  so  than  I  am  doing  it, — but  in  order  to  get 
results,  this  community  must  co-operate. 


Extension  of  Leases. 

Now,  if  the  Commission  pleases,  may  I  say  a  few  words 
about  these  leases?  This  question  has  been  referred,  and  it 
is  whether  or  not  it  is  advisable,  expedient,  and  in  the  pub¬ 
lic  interest  to  provide  in  advance  of  the  expiration  thereof 
for  extensions  of  the  existing  contracts  for  the  use  of  the 
Tremont  Street  subway,  the  Washington  Street  tunnel,  and 
the  East  Boston  tunnel,  and,  if  so,  on  what  terms  and  con¬ 
ditions,  and  for  what  period  of  time. 

The  lease  of  the  Tremont  Street  subway  was  originally 
for  twenty  years,  and  expires  on  September  1,  1917,  or  in 
less  than  seven  years  from  the  present  time. 

The  lease  of  the  East  Boston  tunnel  was  originally  for 
twenty-five  years,  and  expires  June  10,  1922,  or  at  the  same 
time  as  the  West  End  lease. 


18 


The  lease  of  the  Washington  Street  tunnel  was  originally 
for  twenty-five  years,  and  expires  November  30,  1933. 

Two  courses  are  open:  (1)  To  wait  until  the  expiration 
of  these  leases,  and  then  to  take  up  the  question  separately 
upon  the  expiration  of  each  lease  whether  it  shall  be  re¬ 
newed,  and,  if  so,  for  what  period  and  upon  what  terms. 
The  other  alternative  is  to  determine  at  the  present  time 
upon  a  renewal  of  these  leases  and  fixing  the  peiiod  of  time 
for  which  they  shall  be  renewed. 

Until  these  leases  are  actually  extended  it  must  remain 
uncertain  as  to  whether  they  will  be  in  fact  extended,  and 
also  as  to  the  terms  upon  which  they  will  be  extended.  If 
they  have  a  long  period  to  run,  the  matter  is  of  compar¬ 
atively  no  immediate  importance;  but  in  view  of  the  fact 
that  the  Tremont  Street  subway  lease  has  but  about  seven 
years  to  run,  the  East  Boston  tunnel  lease  eleven  years,  the 
Washington  Street  tunnel  lease  twenty-two  years,  and  in 
view  of  the  fact  that  these  subways  and  tunnels  are  essen¬ 
tial  parts  of  the  transportation  systems,  and  in  view  of  the 
fact  that  the  company  is  expected  to  lay  out  its  plans  and 
provide  for  an  increase  of  transportation  facilities  for  from 
eight  to  ten  years  ahead,  it  is  imperative  that  no  uncer¬ 
tainty  should  exist  as  to  the  extension  of  these  leases. 

When  the  question  comes  before  the  company  of  incurring 
large  capital  expenditures  or  assuming  large  additional 
obligations  for  the  purpose  of  furnishing  additional  facili¬ 
ties,  it  must  consider  not  only  the  question  of  the  annual 
cost  of  the  capital  required  and  the  annual  charge  because 
of  any  obligations  assumed,  but  also  the  probability  of  any 
increase  or  diminution  in  the  cost  of  operating  the  prop¬ 
erties  as  they  now  exist.  It  cannot  fail  to  take  into 
consideration  the  question  as  to  whether  or  not  the  annual 
expense  of  essential  parts  of  its  system  is  likely  to  be  in¬ 
creased  or  diminished,  nor  can  it  forget  the  possibility 
that  these  leases  may  not  be  renewed,  in  which  case  a  sub- 


14 


stantial  rearrangement  of  its  system  might  be  necessary, 
involving  large  additional  expense  and  possible  loss  of  rev¬ 
enue.  If  the  Directors  are  prudent  managers  of  the  prop¬ 
erty,  this  uncertainty  necessarily  makes  them  less  willing  to 
enter  into  undertakings  involving  additional  capital  expendi¬ 
tures  and  additional  obligations,  especially  where  many  years 
must  elapse  before  their  completion  and  before  the  new  un¬ 
dertakings  can  show  a  fair  return  on  the  expenditure  re¬ 
quired. 

The  Board  may  say  that  in  all  probability  these  leases 
will  be  renewed,  and,  while  I  agree  that  that  is  so,  never¬ 
theless,  it  is  conceivable  that  they  may  not  be.  This  is 
shown  by  the  fact  that  the  representative  of  the  city  of 
Boston  in  connection  with  the  Elevated  Holding  Bill  has 
insisted  that  before  it  should  take  effect  the  existing  leases 
of  the  subways  and  tunnels  should  be  renewed  because, 
as  he  claims,  the  passage  of  the  Holding  Bill  might  deprive 
the  city  of  another  customer  for  these  leases  which  it  would 
otherwise  have,  and,  whatever  the  probability  may  be,  both 
the  terms  and  the  fact  of  such  extension  are  uncertain. 

The  only  reason  that  I  have  ever  heard  suggested  why 
these  leases  should  not  be  extended  at  the  present  time  and 
renewed  for  a  long  period  is  that  the  rates  of  interest  may 
change,  and  that  the  rate  of  rental  which  might  be  fixed 
now  might  not  be  fair  at  the  end  of  forty  years.  I  do  not 
think  this  argument  is  sound.  If  it  had  any  force,  it  would 
prevent  anybody  from  making  any  arrangements  for  any 
number  of  years. 

The  city  issued  its  bonds  to  pay  for  these  subways  pay¬ 
able  at  periods  of,  say,  forty  years  from  their  date  at  a 
fixed  rate  of  interest.  If  there  is  anything  in  the  argument 
mentioned,  it  would  have  been  better  for  the  city  to  have 
borrowed  the  money  for  short  periods  of  time  on  the  theory 
that  the  rate  of  interest  might  be  lower.  No  one  will 
doubt  that  the  policy  of  the  city  in  issuing  its  long-time 


15 


bonds  was  a  wise  one,  and  it  is  a  matter  of  common  expe¬ 
rience,  in  enterprises  and  undertakings  requiring  large  ex¬ 
penditures  of  money  and  the  projection  of  undertakings 
requiring  years  for  their  fulfilment,  that  arrangements  must 
be  made  for  long  periods  of  years  so  that  the  parties  may 
have  a  certainty  as  to  financial  requirements,  and  it  is  also 
a  matter  of  common  experience  that  even  then  there  may 
be  during  the  period  changes  in  the  rates  of  interest  with 
the  certainty  that  the  benefit  arising  from  the  certainty  of 
long-time  arrangements  more  than  offsets  any  possible  gain 
from  any  slight  change  in  interest  rates. 

Neither  is  there  anything  in  the  suggestion  that  by  mak¬ 
ing  contracts  for  the  subways  and  tunnels  for  a  long  period 
of  years  the  State  is  in  any  respect  depriving  itself  of  the 
control  which  it  should  exercise  over  the  transportation 
system.  By  the  very  terms  of  these  leases  the  company 
in  the  operation  of  the  subways  and  tunnels  is  subject  to 
the  jurisdiction  and  control  of  the  State  through  its  Board 
of  Railroad  Commissioners  to  the  same  extent  that  it  is 
in  the  use  and  operation  of  its  surface  and  other  lines,  and 
no  one  doubts  that  that  control  is  sufficient  at  all  times  to 
insure  a  proper  performance  by  the  company  of  its  duties 
to  the  public. 


Consolidation  of  Elevated  and  West  End. 

There  is  another  awkward  condition  which  confronts  us, 
and  that  also  has  been  referred  to  you.  The  Legislature 
has  asked  you  to  report  as  to  whether  or  not  it  is  advis¬ 
able,  expedient,  and  in  the  public  interest  to  provide  for 
further  modifications  of  Chapter  551  of  the  Acts  of  the 
year  1908,  The  West  End  Consolidated  Act,  or  to  pro¬ 
vide  by  any  other  method,  and,  if  so,  by  what  method 
for  continuing  the  advantage  of  a  single  control  of  the 
systems  of  the  Boston  Elevated  and  the  West  End. 


16 


On  June  10,  1922,  unless  some  other  arrangement  is  made, 
the  Boston  Elevated  Railway  Company  is  required  by  the 
terms  of  its  lease  to  surrender  to  the  West  End  Street  Rail¬ 
way  Company  substantially  the  entire  surface  systems  of 
railways  adequately  equipped  and  fitted  for  operation  as  a 
complete  and  independent  system. 

The  two  systems  to-day  are  a  unit,  so  far  as  equipment 
and  operation  are  concerned.  The  surface  lines  and  the 
elevated  lines  provide  a  single  system  of  transportation, 
each  one  supplementing  the  other,  a  system  both  convenient 
and  economical  to  the  public.  Of  the  passengers  who  pay 
a  cash  fare  it  is  estimated  that  not  less  than  35  per  cent, 
at  the  present  time  use  both  the  surface  and  Elevated 
systems  to  complete  their  journey,  and  with  the  completion 
of  the  Cambridge  subway  and  the  East  Cambridge  Ele¬ 
vated  this  percentage  will  be  very  substantially  increased. 
Neither  system  can,  by  itself,  convey  a  substantial  part 
of  the  passengers  from  their  point  of  departure  to  their  des¬ 
tination.  Furthermore,  up  to  the  present  time,  in  pro¬ 
viding  power  for  the  operation  of  the  cars  the  systems  have 
been  treated  as  a  unit,  and  the  power  is  supplied  either  from 
the  station  belonging  to  the  Elevated,  or  from  the  stations 
of  the  West  End,  indiscriminately,  to  surface  and  Elevated 
lines  alike. 

I  do  not  believe  that  it  requires  any  argument  to  convince 
the  Joint  Boards  of  the  advantages  from  a  public  standpoint, 
of  a  continued  single  control  of  the  Elevated  and  West  End 
systems.  These  advantages  are,  in  brief,  well  expressed 
in  the  report  of  1905  of  the  Royal  Commission  on  the  Means 
of  Locomotion  and  Transport  in  London.  They  use  the 
following  language: — 

“All  large  systems  of  mechanical  traction  can  be 
worked  most  economically  and  with  the  greatest  ad¬ 
vantage  to  the  public  when  they  are  under  one  and 
the  same  management.  It  is  only  by  extensions  and 


17 


amalgamations  that  the  great  advantages  arising  from 
unity  of  interest  and  unity  of  management  can  be  fully 
realized.” 

Speaking  of  the  Underground  Electric  Railways  Company 
of  London,  they  say: — 

“Though  the  various  undertakings  controlled  by  the 
company  have  not  been  technically  amalgamated,  they 
have  been  brought  under  single  control  with  signal 
advantage  to  the  public,  and  it  cannot  be  doubted  that 
an  extension  of  the  principle  of  amalgamation  to  the 
whole  of  the  Electric  railways  and  tramways  of  London 
would  be  attended  with  still  greater  public  benefit. 
It  might  perhaps  eventually  be  carried  a  step  further 
so  as  to  include  the  Metropolitan  omnibus  services, 
so  that  all  the  public  means  of  locomotion  in  London, 
with  the  exception  of  the  Trunk  Railways,  railroads, 
and  cabs,  might  be  brought  into  one  comprehensive 
system  under  single  management.” 

The  original  lease  of  the  West  End  Street  Railway  Com¬ 
pany  to  the  Boston  Elevated  was  for  ninety-nine  years. 
It  was  subsequently  reduced  to  twenty-five  years.  I  do 
not  believe  the  parties  in  interest  would  have  consented  to 
a  lease  for  that  short  period  of  time  but  for  the  expectation 
that  long  before  the  expiration  of  the  lease  the  two  systems 
would  be  amalgamated  upon  some  permanent  basis. 

Everybody,  so  far  as  I  know,  agrees  that  the  advantages 
of  a  single  control  of  the  West  End  and  Elevated  systems 
should  be  continued  through  some  form  of  consolidation, 
and  the  only  question  about  which  there  has  been  any  differ¬ 
ence  of  opinion  has  been  with  respect  to  the  terms  of  such 
a  consolidation. 

In  1908  the  Legislature  authorized  a  consolidation  of  the 
two  systems  upon  the  basis  that  the  preferred  stockholders 
of  the  West  End  Company  in  place  of  their  preferred  stock 
should  be  given  a  first  preferred  8  per  cent,  stock  of  the 
Elevated  Railway  Company,  and  that  the  common  stock- 


18 


holders  of  the  West  End  should  receive  a  second  preferred 
stock  of  the  Elevated  Company  bearing  7  per  cent,  divi¬ 
dends.  This  legislation  was  advocated  by  the  Boston 
Elevated  Railway  Company  without  any  previous  expres¬ 
sion  of  opinion  by  the  West  End  directors  or  stockholders 
as  to  whether  or  not  the  terms  would  be  satisfactory  to 
them.  It  was  not  practicable  at  that  time  to  obtain  any 
such  expression  of  opinion. 

After  the  passage  of  the  Act  it  was  found  that  the  West 
End  stockholders  did  not  regard  the  terms  as  satisfactory, 
and  would  not  consent  to  a  transfer  of  their  property  to 
the  Elevated  upon  the  terms  mentioned  in  that  Act.  The 
West  End  stockholders  claimed  in  substance  that  under 
the  existing  lease  they  had  as  security  not  only  the  entire 
property  of  the  West  End  Company,  subject  only  to  the 
indebtedness  of  that  company,  but  also,  in  common  with 
its  creditors,  the  property  of  the  Boston  Elevated;  that 
under  the  form  of  consolidation  proposed  their  rights  would 
be  postponed  to  all  the  indebtedness  of  both  the  West 
End  Railway  Company  and  of  the  Boston  Elevated  Rail¬ 
way  Company,  and  that  they  would  be  taking  the  risk  of 
the  obligations  which  the  Elevated  Company  had  assumed 
in  the  past  and  would  assume  in  the  future  in  connection 
with  the  additional  rapid  transit  facilities;  that  the  fact 
that  they  would  be  given,  as  they  claimed,  an  inferior 
security  from  what  they  already  had  should  be  recog¬ 
nized,  and  that  they  should  be  allowed  to  divide  certain 
so-called  “free  assets”  of  the  West  End  Street  Railway 
Company,  and  that  the  rate  of  dividend  upon  the  second 
preferred  stock  to  be  issued  in  place  of  the  present  common 
stock  of  the  West  End  should  be  fixed  at  8  per  cent.  In 
order  to  enforce  their  views,  an  organization  was  effected 
and  a  Protective  Committee  was  appointed. 

Such  has  been  the  situation  down  to  the  present  time. 
After  extended  negotiations,  I  am  informed  through  the 


19 


counsel  of  the  West  End  and  through  counsel  for  the  Pro¬ 
tective  Committee  that  in  their  judgment  the  stockholders 
of  the  West  End  are  prepared  to  waive  their  claim  to  the 
so-called  “free  assets”  of  the  West  End  Company  and  to 
consent  to  a  consolidation  on  the  basis  of  8  per  cent,  divi¬ 
dends  on  the  second  preferred  stock,  and  the  question,  there¬ 
fore,  now  before  the  Joint  Boards  has  reduced  itself  to 
this:  as  to  whether  or  not  it  is  expedient  and  in  the  public 

*  interest  to  authorize  a  modification  of  the  Act  of  1908  so 
as  to  provide  for  the  payment  of  an  8  per  cent,  dividend  on 

v  the  second  preferred  stock  of  the  Elevated  Road  or  to 

•  indefinitely  postpone  any  consolidation. 

It  is  of  the  utmost  importance  to  the  community  that 
this  consolidation  should  be  effected  at  once,  and  not  post¬ 
poned  indefinitely  or  until  the  expiration  of  the  lease. 

The  lease  comes  to  an  end  in  eleven  years.  In  an  under¬ 
taking  of  this  character  for  rapid  transit  in  this  community 
eleven  years  is  but  a  short  period.  Plans  and  provisions 
must  be  made  for  many  years  ahead,  and  this  cannot  be 
done  in  the  face  of  uncertainty  as  to  the  future,  especially 
in  view  of  the  uncertainty  as  to  whether  or  not  the  surface 
system  is  to  be  separated  from  the  Elevated  system  at 
the  expiration  of  this  short  period  of  eleven  years. 

The  Washington  Street  tunnel  was  projected  in  1902, 
and  was  not  completed  and  ready  for  operation  until  the 
expiration  of  six  years. 

The  Cambridge  subway  was  projected  in  1904,  and  finally 
authorized  in  its  present  form  in  1906,  and  will  not  be  ready 
«  for  operation  for  another  year  or  more,  or  from  seven  to 

eight  years  from  the  time  it  was  planned.  These  facts  show 
how  impracticable  it  is  for  the  Elevated  to  enter  into  under- 
*  takings  for  promoting  rapid  transit  when  the  entire  system 

may  be  disrupted  in  a  little  over  eleven  years. 

The  State  recognizes  the  principle  that  one  of  the  most 
important  matters  in  connection  with  public  service  cor- 


20 


porations  is  to  limit  the  amount  of  capital  invested  to  the 
necessary  requirements  of  the  service.  To  secure  this  it  is 
the  duty  of  the  Railroad  Commissioners  to  supervise,  in  the 
case  of  transportation  companies,  the  issue  of  capital  so 
that  no  unnecessary  amount  may  be  issued.  It  is  also 
recognized  as  fundamental  that  the  public  service  corpora¬ 
tion  shall  operate  its  property  in  the  most  economical 
manner  with  due  regard  to  the  requirements  of  the  public, 
and  that  all  waste  shall  be  avoided. 

The  cost  of  providing  power  for  the  operation  of  the  Ele¬ 
vated  and  surface  lines,  both  because  of  the  capital  in¬ 
vested  and  the  cost  of  generating  and  distributing  the  power, 
is  a  large  item  in  the  expenditures  of  the  company.  Under 
the  terms  of  the  lease  of  the  West  End  Company  the  Ele¬ 
vated  must  return  that  company’s  property  equipped  and 
provided  with  its  own  power,  so  that  it  can  be  independently 
operated  as  a  separate  system.  That  means  that  the  power 
supply  at  the  expiration  of  the  lease  for  each  company  must 
be  separate  and  distinct. 

It  needs  no  argument  to  show  that  to  provide  the  surface 
and  Elevated  systems  which  interlace  each  other  with  sepa¬ 
rate  and  distinct  power  would  involve  not  only  a  wasteful 
expenditure  of  capital,  but  also  a  wasteful  operating  expense. 

Messrs.  Stone  &  Webster  estimated  in  1908  that  with  the 
power  requirements  of  the  two  systems  increased  to  the 
extent  which  would  be  necessary  in  ten  years,  or  in  1918, 
there  would  be  an  actual  waste  of  $600,000  a  year  if  the 
surface  and  Elevated  lines  were  separately  equipped  with 
power  plants  and  operated  independently  of  each  other, 
and  that  the  amount  would  be  still  greater  at  the  expiration 
of  the  lease  in  1922. 

It  may  be  suggested  that  the  two  systems  could  be  oper¬ 
ated  as  one  until  the  expiration  of  the  lease,  and  that  there 
need  be  no  waste  until  that  time,  and  that  the  question  of 
consolidation  can  be  indefinitely  postponed.  On  the  con- 


21 


trary,  unless  a  consolidation  is  effected  at  once,  there  is 
bound  to  be  in  the  near  future  a  waste  in  operation  and  a 
waste  of  capital  expended  on  this  account. 

In  the  first  place  it  is  obvious  that  the  construction  of 
power  plants  and  the  provision  of  necessary  conductors  and 
wires  to  transmit  the  power  to  different  parts  of  the  system 
is  a  matter  of  years  to  provide,  and  the  Elevated  cannot 
wait  until  the  expiration  of  the  lease  to  provide  power  which 
will  be  required  for  the  separate  operation  of  the  two  sys¬ 
tems.  Further,  in  providing  for  additional  power  at  the 
present  time  the  company  must  know  whether  the  two 
systems  are  to  remain  a  unit  or  whether  they  may  be 
separated  at  the  end  of  eleven  years.  This  is  illustrated  by 
a  question  of  large  importance  which  is  now  concerning  the 
management  of  the  Elevated  Road.  It  has  become  neces¬ 
sary  to  provide  at  once  an  additional  power  plant  of  large 
capacity.  For  this  purpose  the  company  has  purchased 
property  in  South  Boston  at  tide  water  at  a  cost  of  some¬ 
thing  over  $300,000,  it  being  believed  that  by  locating  a 
station  at  tide  water  power  can  be  more  economically  pro¬ 
duced  than  if  it  is  manufactured  elsewhere.  In  order  to 
produce  the  most  economical  results  it  is  found  that  this 
station  should  be  what  is  called  an  alternating  station,  and 
that  the  current  produced  should  be  distributed  through 
sub-stations  over  substantially  the  entire  systems  and  used 
for  surface  and  elevated  lines  indiscriminately.  The  con¬ 
struction  of  this  power  station  with  its  sub-stations  and 
connections  will  require  an  expenditure  of  nearly  three  and 
a  half  millions  of  dollars. 

Now,  the  difficulty  is  this:  if  the  West  End  system  is 
hereafter  separated  from  the  Elevated  system,  a  very  con¬ 
siderable  part  of  this  expenditure  will  be  w*asted,  because 
the  West  End  under  the  lease  must  be  furnished  with  its 
own  independent  system  of  power  supply.  The  alternative 
of  this  development  is  to  provide  separate  power  plants  for 


the  surface  lines  and  for  the  elevated  lines  at  a  very  con¬ 
siderable  increase  in  capital  expenditure  and  in  operating- 
expense. 

Further,  there  are  now  before  your  Boards  propositions 
for  several  subways  to  be  built  and  leased  by  the  Boston 
Elevated.  It  would  at  best  take  several  years  to  complete 
these  subways  ready  for  operation.  They  will  be  either  for 
surface  cars  or  elevated  trains.  At  the  expiration  of  the 
West  End  lease  it  is  provided  that  those  which  constitute 
an  essential  part  of  the  surface  system  shall  become  the 
property  of  the  West  End,  and  those  that  are  part  of  the 
Elevated  S3^stem  shall  belong  to  the  Elevated. 

It  is  not  clear,  however,  how  far  the  West  End  Company 
could  be  compelled  to  take  over  any  of  the  subway  leases 
against  its  will,  especially  as  it  may  claim  that  they  were 
not  an  essential  part  of  its  system  as  long  as  the  company 
was  left  with  a  complete  system  of  surface  tracks  as  required 
by  the  lease.  The  Elevated  would  then  be  left  with  sub¬ 
ways  for  surface  cars  without  any  surface  cars  to  run  in 
them,  or  with  subways  for  elevated  trains  without  any  sur¬ 
face  car  connection. 

In  any  event,  these  new  subways  are  likely  to  be  a  serious 
loss  for  the  first  few  years  after  they  are  constructed.  The 
Elevated  could  hardly  be  expected  to  assume  them  during 
the  short  period  prior  to  the  expiration  of  the  West  End 
lease, — only  to  turn  them  over  to  the  West  End  Company 
at  the  time  when  they  might  possibly  begin  to  show  a  profit. 

Demands  for  improved  facilities  in  the  transportation 
system  in  Boston  have  increased  far  beyond  the  increase  in 
revenue,  and  the  Elevated  Company  is  in  no  position  to 
assume  new  burdens  with  the  uncertainty  existing  as  to  the 
future  of  the  surface  lines  and  in  view  of  the  unnecessary 
expenditures  to  which  it  will  be  put  in  the  near  future  if 
such  a  consolidation  is  not  provided. 

It  occurs  to  me  to  say  that  in  1888  the  percentage  of 


revenue  to  capital  investment  was  42.  It  is  now,  I  think, 
17J4  and  of  course  it  is  growing  less. 

The  change  of  the  rate  of  dividend  on  the  second  pre¬ 
ferred  stock  from  7  to  8  per  cent,  means  an  additional  charge 
of  $125,000  a  year.  The  unnecessary  expenditures  of  capi¬ 
tal  and  the  unnecessary  expense  of  operation,  if  no  consoli¬ 
dation  is  effected,  ought  in  the  near  future  to  more  than 
offset  this  annual  payment,  and  the  additional  capital  from 
time  to  time  required  by  the  company  should  be  obtained 
on  more  favorable  terms  if  this  question  of  consolidation 
is  settled. 

The  Elevated  has  no  desire  to  pay  more  for  the  West  End 
than  it  has  to.  It  is  a  plain  business  proposition.  The 
Elevated  believes  that  it  is  much  better  to  take  over  the 
West  End  property  on  an  8  per  cent,  basis  for  the  second 
preferred  stock  than  to  further  delay  consolidation.  If 
it  is  a  good  proposition  for  the  Elevated,  it  is  equally  so  for 
the  public.  The  question  is  not  what  the  purchasers,  or 
the  public  who  stand  in  very  much  the  same  shoes  as  the 
purchasers,  think  the  West  End  ought  to  do.  The  question 
is  what  is  best  to  be  done. 

The  West  End  stockholders  are  sincere  in  their  belief 
that  they  are  fairly  entitled  to  8  per  cent.  There  is  no 
evidence  or  suggestion  that  they  are  using  their  position 
to  obtain  anything  which  they  believe  to  be  unreasonable, 
nor  can  it  be  said  that  what  they  claim  is  unreasonable 
from  their  point  of  view. 

In  itself  the  dividend  rate  of  8  per  cent,  is  not  unreason¬ 
able.  It  is  the  rate  which  was  earned  and  paid  by  the 
West  End  Company  prior  to  its  lease  to  the  Elevated  Com¬ 
pany,  and  is  recognized  by  the  General  Laws  of  1906  as 
reasonable  in  so  far  as  they  provide  for  a  division  with  the 
State  of  any  excess  earnings  in  excess  of  8  per  cent,  divi¬ 
dends. 

The  actual  amount  paid  in  by  the  common  stockholders 


24 


of  the  West  End  Street  Railway  Company,  the  par  value 
of  the  stock  being  $50  per  share,  is  $61.24  per  share,  and  a 
dividend  at  the  rate  of  8  per  cent,  upon  par  means  approx¬ 
imately  only  6J4  per  cent,  on  the  cash  actually  paid  in. 
Nearly  one-half  of  this  stock  has  been  paid  in  since  1891, 
or  during  the  last  twenty  years,  at  an  average  price  of 
$76.23  per  share,  and  8  per  cent,  dividends  on  par  mean 
only  a  trifle  over  5  per  cent,  on  the  actual  cash  paid  in  for 
the  stock  during  the  last  twenty  years. 

As  to  the  stock  which  was  paid  in  before  1891  at  par, 
this  money  was  invested  at  the  time  the  West  End  was 
being  electrically  equipped,  when  the  success  of  the  enter¬ 
prise  was  problematical.  Certainly  8  per  cent,  is  not  an 
unreasonable  return  upon  the  investment  in  an  undertak¬ 
ing  which  was  so  hazardous  as  was  that  of  the  West  End 
at  that  time. 

Further,  in  the  case  of  this  company  no  interest  or  divi¬ 
dends  are  being  paid  upon  any  franchise  value  or  upon  any¬ 
thing  but  actual  cash  invested  in  the  property,  which  fact 
has  an  important  bearing  upon  the  reasonableness  of  any 
rate  which  is  proposed. 

The  whole  question  is  whether  it  is  better  for  the  public 
that  a  consolidation  should  now  be  authorized  on  the  basis 
of  8  per  cent,  for  the  common  stock  of  the  West  End  Com¬ 
pany,  or  whether  the  whole  matter  should  be  indefinitely 
postponed.  There  is  no  other  alternative,  and  we  believe 
that  there  can  be  but  one  answer  to  the  question. 


The  West  End  Loop . 

Gentlemen,  there  has  been  referred  to  you  the  question  of 
acquiring  the  property  and  rights  of  other  companies  by  the 
Elevated.  I  understand  that  your  views  on  that  subject 
were  reported  to  the  Legislature,  and  that  they  were  re¬ 
ferred  back  because  of  the  question  of  the  extension  of  the 


25 


leases.  Now,  assuming  that  the  attitude  of  the  Joint  Boards 
is  not  changed,  I  have  nothing  to  say  on  that  subject. 

There  is  a  question  as  to  a  subway  provision,  under  the 
Act  of  last  year,  which  I  think  was  approved  in  April, — I 
have  forgotten  the  number  of  the  chapter, — it  is  commonly 
called  “The  West  End  Loop,”  which,  as  I  understand  it, 
contemplates  the  provision  of  a  subway  under  the  exist- 

*  ing  Tremont  Street  subway  from  Park  Street  to  Scollay 
Square,  under  Scollay  Square  to  Court  Street,  under  Bow- 
doin  Square  and  some  portion  of  Cambridge  Street  to  a 

*  connection  with  the  Cambridge  thoroughfare  at  or  near 
the  entrance  of  that  thoroughfare  to  Beacon  Hill.  I 
regret  to  say, — because  my  good  friends  whom  I  see  here 
are  interested,  and  it  is  a  natural  desire  that  in  the  expendi¬ 
ture  of  these  millions  about  which  we  have  been  talking 
they  should  get  some  share, — I  regret  to  say  that  the  scheme 
does  not  commend  itself  to  our  judgment. 

In  the  first  place,  when  the  Legislature  provided  for  a 
rapid  transit  thoroughfare  from  Cambridge,  the  provision 
was  made  for  a  choice  of  routes.  That  choice  was  given  to 
the  Transit  Commission.  Hearings  were  had,  the  matter  was 
carefully  considered,  and  the  decision  was  for  Park  Street 
as  the  terminus.  We  do  not  think  it  would  be  fair  to  re¬ 
quire  us  to  build  what  is  not  only  another  thoroughfare 

of  the  same  extent,  but  even  much  more.  I  am  told  by 

our  engineer,  who  has  not  made  a  careful  estimate  (and  I 
have  never  seen  a  careful  estimate  made  of  anything  of 
this  magnitude  yet  which  was  absolutely  accurate  in  the 
event),  but  he  tells  me  that  the  expenditure  would  be  four 
millions  of  dollars.  However,  if  that  is  not  a  just  esti¬ 
mate,  there  are  grave  operating  difficulties  and  a  great 
interference  with  the  general  design.  For  instance,  if  the 
Cambridge  subway  is  to  be  extended  to  the  South  Station, 

»  that  undertaking  would  be  inconsistent  with  the  provision 

„  of  this  subway  around  and  under  the  existing  Tremont 


26 


Street  subway,  or,  at  the  very  best,  it  would  be  extremely 
unsuitable. 

When  we  get  to  Scollay  Square,  Scollay  Square  is  needed 
for  something  else.  I  have  listened  to,  or  rather  I  have 
read  with  much  interest,  the  remarks  that  have  been  made 
about  the  congestion  at  Park  Street.  Well,  if  there  is 
congestion  at  Park  Street,  there  is  no  spot  in  the  business 
heart  of  Boston,  with  the  exception  possibly  of  Dewey 
Square, — and  not  that  even,  when  the  entire  area  is  taken 
under  consideration, — where  there  is  such  an  expanse  of 
territory  for  the  distribution  of  human  beings  as  Boston 
Common,  or  that  corner  of  it  at  Park  Street,  because  we 
have  Tremont  Street,  which  is  a  broad  business  street, 
out  of  which  lead  cross-thoroughfares,  like  West  Street, 
Temple  Place,  Winter  Street,  Bromfield  Street,  and  Park 
Street,  up  the  hill,  and  the  Common  itself.  If  there  is 
congestion  there,  it  should  be  relieved  by  the  enlargement 
of  the  station  facilities,  and  that  is  about  to  be  done.  But 
Scollay  Square  will  also  be  needed.  What  for?  The  East 
Boston  tunnel  has  been  built,  and  there  have  been  various 
methods  suggested  as  to  its  use.  And  here  is  a  case  where 
experience  is  a  much  better  teacher  than  foresight.  The 
company  thought  at  one  time,  against  the  wisdom  of  the 
Transit  Commission,  that  the  East  Boston  tunnel  should 
be  brought  into  the  Tremont  Street  subway.  Well,  obvi¬ 
ously,  if  that  were  done,  the  Tremont  Street  subway  north 
of  the  junction  would  be  reduced  in  capacity,  because,  if 
the  East  Boston  tunnel  cars  were  coming  in  there,  too, 
there  would  have  to  be  a  corresponding  reduction  of  cars 
in  the  Tremont  Street  subway.  What  should  be  done? 
Why,  obviously,  the  East  Boston  tunnel, — and  I  think,  we 
understand  at  least  we  agree,  without  forestalling  any 
official  action, — should  have  a  loop  under  Scollay  Square. 
I  cannot  conceive  of  any  more  important  or  essential  pur¬ 
pose  in  the  general  design  to  put  Scollay  Square  to  than 


27 


that.  It  will  at  least  increase  the  capacity  of  the  tunnel 
from  60  cars  to  180  an  hour,  with  some  diminution,  of  course, 
in  the  rate  of  speed.  But  there  is  another  use  to  which 
Scollay  Square  is  sought  to  be  put,  and  I  am  astonished — 
not  here,  but  in  the  community  in  some  quarters — at  the 
lack  of  appreciation  of  the  function  of  the  East  Cambridge 
elevated  extension,  of  which  very  little  has  been  said  in 
public.  This  East  Cambridge  elevated  extension  will 
furnish  a  direct  approach  to  the  city  from  a  large  section 
of  Somerville.  The  cars  which  enter  upon  it  will  come 
from  the  very  backbone — Highland  Avenue — of  Somer¬ 
ville.  It  will  also  serve  a  large  portion  of  the  city  of  Cam¬ 
bridge,  the  largest  of  the  municipalities  in  the  suburbs. 
It  will  be  much  more  direct,  much  quicker,  much  shorter, 
for  those  people  to  come  in  than  to  go  around,  as  they  do 
now,  and  crowd  Sullivan  Square.  And  those  people — and 
the  number  is  augmented  by  the  people  who  come  from 
beyond — are  the  people  who  ought  to  have  Scollay  Square 
for  their  use. 

Moreover,  there  are  operating  conditions  which  are  not 
pleasant  to  contemplate,  under  this  proposed  new  scheme. 
I  do  not  comprehend,  perhaps,  clearly,  how  this  is  to  be 
operated,  but  the  plans  I  have  seen  show  a  double  track 
thoroughfare  all  the  way  around.  I  assume  that  it  is 
intended  that  some  of  the  trams  shall  come  in  from  Cam¬ 
bridge  and  go  through  to  Park  Street  on  our  track,  and 
circle  around  through  Scollay  Square,  Bowdoin  Square,  and 
Cambridge  Street,  and  return;  and  that  other  trains  will, 
in  some  way,  go  the  other  way.  Now,  either  there  is 
going  to  be  a  very  unsuitable  series  of  passages  created 
under  the  Hill  to  avoid  grade  crossings  or  very  uncom¬ 
fortable  grade  crossings  will  have  to  be  created. 

I  do  not  comprehend  how  we  are  to  get  the  revenue 
to  which  we  are  entitled.  A  person  gets  in  at  Park  Street, 
and  he  wants  to  go  to  Cambridge  via  Scollay  Square. 


28 


Others  are  on  the  train  from  Cambridge,  and  they  ought 
not  to  go  back.  What  is  to  prevent  them?  We  ought 
not  to  be  subjected  to  that  condition,  where  we  cannot 
separate  the  “just  from  the  unjust’ ’  Altogether,  the 
provision  is  not  one  which  we  can  approve. 

I  was  interested  to  find,  too,  from  observations  which 
our  company  made  that,  while  we  are  providing  to-day  a 
large  number  of  cars,  the  largest  number  of  cars  that  were 
ever  provided  to  Bowdoin  Square,  the  use  of  those  cars  in 
Boston  is  not  as  large  as  I  had  supposed.  That  community 
is  an  interesting  one,  to  all  Cambridge  people,  of  which 
I  am  one.  I  remember,  and  gentlemen  on  this  Commission 
remember,  the  time  when  we  were  not  thought  of  conse¬ 
quence  enough  to  be  taken  any  further  than  Bowdoin 
Square.  Bowdoin  Square  has  more  cars  now  than  it  had 
then.  But  of  the  28,792  people  who,  on  the  24th  of  last 
month,  used  the  lines  passing  over  Cambridge  bridge  into 
Boston  and  through  Hanover  Street,  only  1,628  left  the  cars 
at  Bowdoin  Square,  and  only  10,534  left  the  cars  at  Hanover 
Street.  In  other  words,  of  the  total  amount  of  people 
carried  on  those  cars,  nearly  29,000,  only  about  12,000  of 
them  got  as  far  as  Bowdoin  Square.  The  rest  used  the  lines 
in  Cambridge  or  elsewhere. 

On  the  next  day  the  figures — 

Commissioner  Crocker.  General  Bancroft,  did  you 
state  that  correctly? 

Gen.  Bancroft.  Yes,  sir. 

Commissioner  Crocker.  These  people  were  coming  in 
or  going  out? 

Gen.  Bancroft.  Coming  in  over  the  Cambridge  bridge, 
all  lines  coming  to  Hanover  Street. 

Commissioner  Crocker.  Now,  what  is  the  statement, 
28,000  in  all? 

Gen.  Bancroft.  The  total  number  registered  was  28,792. 
One  thousand  six  hundred  and  twenty-eight  left  the  cars 


29 


at  Bowdoin  Square.  Ten  thousand,  five  hundred  and  thirty  - 
four  left  the  cars  at  Hanover  Street.  In  other  words,  out 
of  28,792,  a  little  over  12,000  in  all  came  into  town  as  far 
as  Bowdoin  Square. 

Now,  the  next  day  the  figures  were  a  little  different. 
One  thousand,  four  hundred  and  ninety -one  left  at  Bowdoin 
Square;  ten  thousand,  four  hundred  and  sixty  at  Scollay 
f  Square,  and  the  total  number  registered  was  24,600  persons. 

*  Now,  gentlemen,  I  thank  you  for  your  patient  indulgence. 

f1  I  can  only  say  that  we  are  willing  to  do  what  I  have  outlined, 

*  and  that  we  ask  the  co-operation  of  the  community  to  en¬ 

able  us  to  do  it. 

Questions. 

The  Chairman.  Is  there  anything  further  on  behalf  of 
the  Elevated? 

Gen.  Bancroft.  I  think,  sir,  that  is  all  we  have  to 
submit. 

The  Chairman.  Is  there  anybody  else  who  desires  to 
say  anything? 

Mr.  Whiteside.  I  want  to  ask  General  Bancroft  a  ques¬ 
tion. 

The  Chairman.  Very  well. 

Mr.  Whiteside.  I  just  wanted  to  ask  during  what 
hours  of  the  day  did  these  figures  relating  to  the  passengers 
coming  in  over  the  Harvard  bridge  and  getting  off  at 
Hanover  Street  refer? 

Gen.  Bancroft.  The  Cambridge  bridge. 

T  Mr.  Whiteside.  The  Cambridge  bridge?  Yes,  the 

Cambridge  bridge.  I  beg  your  pardon.  During  what 
hours  were  those  figures  taken? 

Gen.  Bancroft.  Mr.  Chairman,  the  statement  handed 
me  by  Mr.  Sergeant  recites  two  days’  count  of  the  pas- 

#  sengers  coming  in  over  the  Cambridge  bridge,  across  and 

^  over  Hanover  Street.  I  assume  they  are  all  figures  for  the 

% 


30 


day,  but  whether  they  continue  during  the  night  I  don’t 
know,  but  that  would  be  negligible.  I  understand  it  was 
twenty -four  hours. 

Mr.  Whiteside.  That  they  were  the  actual  number 
during  the  twenty-four  hours? 

Gen.  Bancroft.  Yes.  I  think  there  can  be  no  doubt 
about  it. 

Mr.  Whiteside.  Well,  if  there  is  any  doubt  about  that, 
if  you  find  out  later  it  is  not  correct,  will  you  let  me  know? 

Gen.  Bancroft.  Certainly. 

The  Chairman.  Then  we  will  understand  it  is  a  car  day, 
unless  you  notify  Mr.  Whiteside  to  the  contrary? 

Gen.  Bancroft.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Whiteside.  And  I  suppose  the  figures  were  taken 
by  inspectors  on  the  cars. 

Gen.  Bancroft.  The  registration  was  taken  from  the 
register. 

Mr.  Whiteside.  The  total  number  registered  was  taken 
from  the  register  on  the  cars? 

Gen.  Bancroft.  Yes.  I  cannot  tell  you  whether  it  was 
a  conductor’s  return  or  an  inspector’s  return  at  this  moment, 
but  I  should  be  glad  to  supply  you  with  that  information. 

Mr.  Whiteside.  1  should  be  veiy  glad  to  have  that. 
Perhaps  the  easier  way  would  be  for  me  to  send  to  your 
office  for  it. 

Gen.  Bancroft.  Or  I  will  send  it  to  you,  as  you  please. 
I  wfill  arrange  that  you  get  it  this  afternoon,  and  I  will 
send  the  information  also  to  the  Board. 

The  Chairman.  Now,  Mr.  Tinkham. 

Mr.  Tinkham.  Mr.  Chairman,  I  wanted  to  ask  a  ques¬ 
tion  of  General  Bancroft.  I  think  General  Bancroft  is 
under  some  misapprehension,  from  his  statement,  as  to 
just  what  controlled  the  Legislature  in  referring  this  matter 
back  to  your  Board.  He  stated  that  he  assumed  that  the 
Legislature  approved  of  the  holding  device.  There  were 


31 


two  reasons  why  the  Legislature — and  I  think  I  speak  with 
authority — referred  this  matter  back  to  this  Joint  Board. 
One  was  that  because  the  extension  of  the  leases  had  not 
been  considered,  and  no  recommendation  had  been  made 
by  your  Board.  The  other  reason  was  because  in  the 
reference  last  year  to  your  Board  of  the  question  you  were 
limited  in  your  advice  to  the  Legislature  to  the  question  of 
a  holding  device  for  the  Elevated  to  acquire  the  stock  and 
control  of  contiguous  railways.  In  your  report  at  that 
time  you  stated  back  to  the  Legislature, — upon  which  the 
last  year’s  bill  was  framed, — you  stated  that  you,  being 
confined  to  that  narrow  question,  made  the  following  recom¬ 
mendations.  The  resolve  which  you  now  have  before  you 
is  broad  and  liberal  in  its  terms,  as  the  subject  deserves, 
and  it  allows  you, — I  believe  the  Legislature  intended  you 
should  take  up  the  question  of  whether  the  acquisition  of 
contiguous  railroads  should  be  obtained  by  the  Elevated 
by  the  holding  device  as  originally  proposed,  or  by  an  ex¬ 
tension  and  an  increase  of  the  powers  of  the  company’s 
present  charter.  I  believe  that  that  is,  next,  perhaps,  to 
the  extension  of  the  subways,  perhaps  as  fully  vital  as  that; 
one  of  the  two  questions  of  importance,  and  one  in  this 
matter  that  was  to  be  considered  by  your  Board,  and  I 
would  like  to  ask  Mr.  Bancroft  why  he  believes  that  the 
holding  device  with  regard  to  the  acquiring  of  stock  in  these 
contiguous  railways  is  superior  both  to  the  public  and  to 
his  corporation,  to  the  extension  of  his  charter  so  that  real 
consolidations  could  be  effected,  provided  of  course  that 
in  the  new  charter,  if  one  was  given  them,  the  5-cent  fare 
limits  were  protected  as  they  are  to-day?  I  have  under¬ 
stood,  although  it  is  merely  unofficial,  that  the  Elevated 
has  been  afraid  of  the  touching  of  their  charter,  because  of 
the  5-cent  fare  limits  and  rights  they  had  in  it;  that  there 
was  no  other  reason  why  they  would  not  be  willing  to  ac- 


32 


3  0112  0619 


cept  fair  amendments  and  extensions  providing  that  was 
not  changed;  and  I  want  to  ask  him  now,  providing  the 
5-cent  fare  limits  were  not  changed, — that  is,  the  rights 
under  the  charter  in  relation  to  5-cent  fare  limits  were  not 
changed, — why  wouldn’t  it  be  better  to  amend  the  charter 
so  that  real  consolidations  would  take  effect  between  his 
railroad  and  the  roads  he  desires  to  acquire,  rather  than,  to 
acquire  those  railroads  by  the  stockholding  device? 

Gen.  Bancroft.  Mr.  Chairman,  I  made  no  compari¬ 
son,  as  you  recall,  as  to  the  superiority  of  one  measure  to 
another;  and  this  is  rather  a  long  question  and  opens  a 
good  deal.  I  do  not  undertake  to  answer  questions  of  that 
sort  without  careful  consideration  and  conference  with  my 
associates.  One  thing,  however,  occurs  to  me  now:  that 
the  East  Boston  tunnel  rental  is  %  of  1  per  cent,  of  our 
gross  revenue,  which  would  pay  for  the  East  Boston  tunnel 
loan  pretty  quick,  if  we  made  very  extensive  consolidations. 
This,  of  course,  we  never  undertook  to  do,  and  of  course 
could  not  do.  That  is  one  reason,  surely,  without  going 
any  further  into  the  question.  The  point  is,  the  bonds  are 
pledged,  I  believe,  to  all  the  revenue  that  is  received.  I 
am  sorry  I  can’t  help  you. 

Mr.  Tinkham.  Do  you  see  any  other  objection  than 
that,  Mr.  Bancroft,  that  is,  except  the  East  Boston  tunnel 
situation? 

Gen.  Bancroft.  Why,  Mr.  Chairman,  our  people  have 
considered  this  question  at  length  and  carefully,  and  our 
conclusions  have  been  stated  in  our  public  statements.  I  do 
not  think  I  can  help  the  gentleman  any  further  at  this  time. 

Mr.  Tinkham.  Thank  you. 

The  Chairman.  Gentlemen,  if  nothing  further  is  to 
come  before  the  Board  at  this  sitting,  we  will  take  an  ad¬ 
journment  to  the  8th  day  of  November,  at  ten  o’clock, 
discharging  the  assignment  of  November  3. 

(Adjourned.) 


